Geography and gender, cartographies, and corporealities

I Some things stay the same, and sometimes this is discouraging and sometimes this is encouraging In the first of my commentaries on gender and geography for this journal, I argued that feminist geography was simply too extensive to be ignored by contemporary accounts of the discipline. A number of book-length studies have been published during the past year which, in their detailed examinations of the construction of gendered environments, allow the same point to be made even more strongly. Two monographs constitute major commentaries on the domestic and workplace geographies of women’s waged labour (Gregson and Lowe, 1994; Hanson and Pratt, 1995), while another two have explored the gendering of planning both as a profession and in its policy-making processes (Greed, 1994; Little, 1994). Kinnaird and Hall (1994) have brought together a number of essays on the gendering of tourism, while Whatmore et al. (1994) consider the question of gender in relation to rural geographies. The more recent interest in geographies and sexualities has been marked by the collection edited by Bell and Valentine (1995), while Blunt (1994) and the essays in Blunt and Rose (1994) insist that discussions of colonial and postcolonia